Mason County Dealt Another Losing Hand

[XLFD]

Mason County Prosecutor Beth Hand and her lack of ethical standards continue to amaze as she approaches the end of her first year as an elected official.  We have seen this firsthand at the local courts, with dismissals of weak cases against people that never should have been targeted by the local justice system.  We have seen her go after this reporter, first with a trespassing charge made against him for walking on a pathway in Cartier Park when it was open for all people, a charge that was thrown out by the court as it was saw by Judge John Middlebrook a puerile violation of basic civil rights to place such a restriction.  

This followed with another malevolent prosecution concerning a specious charge of disturbing the peace.  While other people get charged with this law when they actually engage in loud and boisterous conduct that actually disturbs the peace, I must admit that I was standing on public property, minding my own business, being absolutely quiet until a police officer came by and started threatening me with the power of the state to take away my liberties and my freedom.  Only when I was repeatedly threatened by a police captain to move or face unlawful use of police force and shown the power he was willing to expend (he would summon four other LPD officers to back his threats up) did I deescalate the situation and follow his illicit orders.

Recently, we saw that Hand had warranted felony charges against a disenfranchised Hamlin Township voter without taking a minute or two reviewing the bodycam footage that served as the only material evidence of the crimes alleged against the voter, criminal charges that the prosecutor's office would drop due to them (five months after charging two unwarranted felonies) finally reviewing them and determining that there was nothing to be charged.  This is definitely against prosecutorial ethics, as is the fact that she plea bargained as if the videos were dynamite with defense attorneys who didn't know they were a dud, because they never saw them.

The Ludington Torch went down to the courthouse to review the records of the case of the quiet bystander who was charged with disturbing the peace, and found a couple of amazing, yet not surprising, items on the charging document shown below in relevant part:

The first thing of note is that the charge was for disturbing "without lawful authority the peaceful and lawful assembly of persons at the Ludington City Hall" (see 34-98(4) of the city code) referencing the special meeting of the Ludington City Council in early August.  One would think that those who actually were part of the meeting that was allegedly disturbed would be part of the witness pool, but there were only three police officers named. 

If this goes to trial rather than being dismissed by the judge as baseless beforehand, I will instruct my attorney to subpoena every participant at that meeting so they can come before the court and under oath explain how their meeting was disturbed by my actions.  Unfortunately, it won't get that far.  It should also be noted that I am well into the second month after arraignment of this crime and still have yet to see any discovery materials come from the prosecutor (confirmed by my counsel), so I and my lawyer are still unaware of the police report, body cam videos, and security cam videos that may be used against me in this latest faux charge.

The second thing you notice is that it was the one and only Beth Hand who signed off on the prosecution of this case in late August, reminding us once again that she lacks the ethical character needed for one in her position.  You may recall the case she took up directly where she would have been the state's star witness of the crime alleged.  In that case, she called herself "Beth Wiegand", never disclosing to the investigating state trooper that she would be the prosecutor involved with charging the crime she witnessed, and in keeping with the deception, she would give him fictitious information about where she lived.  

Back when the Hamlin case mentioned above was taking place this spring, I had made a FOIA request to Prosecutor Hand to view a small section of the body cams from two deputies that responded-- records that were up to that point, unseen by the defendant and her counsel.  I was given a blanket denial, without any meaningful reason given other than that the case was still active and that I would be granted them with proper redactions after the prosecution was over.  This type of denial under FOIA is not allowed as defined by statute and precedent.  I filed a FOIA disclosure lawsuit with the prosecutor's office in April and it is still ongoing-- in fact, I have a motion hearing later today with the prosecutor.  I can't see myself not winning in this case.

Thus, when I have an open civil case with the Mason County Prosecutor, they have filed a baseless criminal charge against me.  One could presume the action was retaliatory or meant as a punitive measure against someone for challenging their unlawful policy of not disclosing non-exempt portions of public records.  The American Bar Association's manual for prosecutors indicate that such actions in general present a conflict of interest for the prosecutor, but the A.I. Google uses is more succinct:

 

Prosecutor Beth Hand was handed a warrant request from the City of Ludington (who contracts with her for prosecuting city code violations) via their police department while this civil case is active with her office.  Rather than give it to another nearby county prosecutor to avoid this major conflict of interest, she kept it.  Maybe she figured that no other regional prosecutor would be so corrupted as to think there was an actual crime involved with what happened that day in August where I reportedly disturbed a meeting without uttering a word or doing any substantive action.

She saw the opportunity to use her position of power and abuse the authority given to her by the voters of Mason County to charge a member of the free press with a crime that wasn't supported by the facts.  Whether it's because she was sued for violating public records law or for me writing the truth about her lack of character and basic morals in her official actions, it makes little difference.